Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
MSNBC 6
MSNBCW 6
WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
CSPAN 2
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
KRCB (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
pretty good effect thus far on things like the fiscal cliff and debt ceiling. republicans will try to draw a line somewhere. i'm not sure why yet. >> they thought they could draw it on national security with chuck hagel, and we've seen in the last 48 hours the president picked up the phone and he cauldron widen. he hasn't called too many senators too often, even in his own party. he cauldron widen because they had a real obstacle, and he knew that his cia nominee, his close friend, someone he is really eager to have confirmed john brennan, was in trouble going to that hearing. now not so much trouble. >> not so much trouble. these hearings are always as much about the -- using the moment as a lever to dislodge things that congress wants as they are about the nominee himself. i don't think there were a lot of questions about john brennan's kwaul ficks for the job. if i might say to live township the transparency that's been happy to profess. can i go back to the state of the union? i want to add a little bit of a note of caution to all this presidential huffing and puffing, which is
the debt ceiling. if republicans had gone into this issue and said they would not raise the debt ceiling unless they got cuts, there would have lost that the raid at the end. big loss that debate. john boehner and paul rand did a great job together. you cannot govern from that office, you but you have to be very careful about high-profile last-minute negotiations. i've worked in the white house and three administrations. the president has a tremendous institutional advantage in these kinds of fights. what republicans have to do is avoid these fights, the straps that they are laying. provide an alternative through passing legislation, just to show this is how they would govern if they had the powers of the presidency and the senate. and be careful. there are some rough edges. host: some are not strategy as far as moving the debt ceiling ahead. guest: if they had gone ahead with it, it would have been politically cataclysmic. it was the worst percival -- worst possible ground to make their point. president obama 1. i think it's absolutely crucial for the future of the country that you cann
.2 trillion. if we bump into the national debt ceiling and by the way the good news is the republicans are talking more and more like this is not going to happen. but if we do, we have to go to a balance budget in a minute. can't borrow anymore. we've got a deficit that's, let's just call it morning friends a trillion. the c.b.o. estimate was a little bit below finally. but around the neighborhood of a trillion. that's 12 times 85. on top of that, you will... you have t danger of kicking off a worldwide financial panic as people start worrying about, well, is the united states going to default on its debt? if it comes down to paying social security payments or the interest on the debt, are we so sure that america will cut the social security payments and pay the interest on the debt? and a whole bunch of questions like that that we don't want anybody thinking about. we always want people thinking america is going to pay its obligations all of them. all of them. >> charlie: and america is. and we always have. i believe we will. but that's why i'm sorri about even if it's a small probabi
ceiling debt debacle of 2011. here is what president obama was demanding. >> at minimum we've got to raise the debt ceiling. so, that's the bare minimum that has to be achieved. >> here is what john boehner and the republicans in the house were demanding. >> the house cannot pass a bill that raises taxes on job creators. the house could only pass a debt limit bill that includes spending cuts larger than the hike in the debt limit as well as real restraints on future spending. >> and here is what john boehner said when the final bill was si signed into law with the dreaded sequester. >> when you look at this final agreement that we came to with the white house, i got 98% of what i wanted. i'm pretty happy. >> to his credit, that's how republicans lindsey graham remembers it as well. >> as john will say it with straight talk, we have our fingerprints as republicans on this proposal, on this sequestration idea. it was the president's idea, according to bob woodward's book, but we as the republican party gagreed to it. we got in this mess together and we're going to have to get out together. >
. the guy who helped craft the debt ceiling plan. when he puts out that budget that is the document republicans have to run on the next two years because it has severe spending cuts on the domestic side because they have to balance the budget in ten years, a mighty task because they don't want to raise taxes. >> he has no interest in the sheer grind of campaigning. it's hard to see him having what it takes to run for president in 2016. is that even in his mind? is that a possibility for him? >> i don't think he's ever rule it out having been the veep last time and having national statutostature and i do think you have to wapt badly and willing to go for two years that state to state, talking to folks at the grassroots and i don't think he really likes that. likes the idea of spending some time with his family and work the halls of congress. the next two years are about austerity for the republican party. that would be really tough to run for president trying to partially privatize medicare and cut domestic spending across the board. >> quickly, paul ryan, does he have what it takes
with this sequester, it was a total disaster for them. then they decide not to fight on the debt ceiling and they need to move the attention on to something else. say they do have leverage elsewhere. so they have chosen sequester and put up a very brave face on it. it's possible they could convince themselves to let it actually happen but the idea that they get some sort of significant political gain from it, these are cuts they hated and they hated in large part because they hurt things they care about. so to permit the sequester to go forward on that kind of rationale is not a political win, not a policy win. everybody is losing. >> the "new york times" op-ed says more than a million jobs are on the line if this deal isn't made. a quote saying the losses will soon spread as contracts to states and cities are cut, education and police grants are cut, and payments to medicare providers are cut, even the aid just approved to victims of hurricane sandy will fall under the sequester's act. americans are about to find out what happens when an entire political party demands deficit reduction at all costs b
out. he made -- he may need them to get some of these bills passed. as he did with the debt ceiling vote. as he did with the bill for hurricane sandy victims. as it came with the fiscal cliff agreement. i see that as a possibility with a gun control and immigration, because while republicans cannot be eager and willing to discuss the issues, pulling suggest that the house may have to pass something. i will meet democrats. host: -- they will need democrats. host: you say the election created a new deadline for the gop? guest: if they do not act on certain things, they may suffer bitter consequences at the polls, especially in those purple districts, areas where republicans are vulnerable. most of the congressional map has been drawn in favor of republicans and that served in congress. it has been difficult for house democrats to retake the house. history shows that in the final two years of an incumbent president's second term, it is impossible for his party to retake the majority in the house. but, they say, look, congress continues to behave as it did in the past two years, the pub
. it gets sort of mini-half deals. >> that's right. i mean, the sequester, the debt ceiling, fiscal cliff, all these things are not so much real problems as they are manufactured partisan problems. but underneath them, you have this real problem which is basically the republicans won the debate on taxes, and the democrats have won the debate on the safety net. and as a result, that's sort of the deficit that we have. and the question is how can we solve it? and history suggests economic growth is the best way, but this deficit is also big enough in the long term that it's probably not going to be enough. and we need some combination of spending cuts and tax increases as well. >> yeah, how do we make that happen, sam? >> i was going to say, part of the problem is the tax revenue problem, which is that you don't have enough people making good incomes, paying good taxes, which is used to fund the social safety net that we value very highly. but it's also a health spending problem in that we spend a of d a lot of that's end of life health as well. one of the curious things about the health c
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)